Nov 08 - Homily: Blessed John Duns Scotus

Temptation will always be about us drawing us toward sin, but the only evil in this is to give into sin.
Today we celebrate the feast of Blessed John Duns Scotus.
Though belief in Mary's Immaculate Conception never wavered among the truly faithful, for centuries theologians were at a loss to explain adequately and with satisfactory doctrinal clarity this privilege accorded the Mother of Christ. Then in "the greatest of centuries" a humble and brilliant friar brought resolution to this knotty question: How was Mary, who was like all human beings in need of redemption, conceived without sin?
To the keen and penetrating mind of the thirteenth-century Franciscan philosopher and theologian, Blessed John Duns Scotus, all Christendom owes respect and honor. For it was Duns Scotus who plodded carefully through the maze of theological reasonings to explain clearly Mary's Immaculate Conception. His study and consideration of the disputed questions regarding Mary's conception without sin dissipated the obstacles to a complete understanding of this privilege and laid a solid foundation for the definition of this dogma.
Very little is known about the early life and family background of John Duns Scotus. He was born in the Scottish Borders town of Duns. After some schooling, he joined the Franciscans about 1290. As a young Franciscan he both studied and taught at Oxford, distinguishing himself in each position. After several years of teaching at Oxford, Duns Scotus left for Paris probably in 1304, there to lecture in the famed University of Paris. Holding only a bachelor's degree from Oxford, he taught admirably.
While in Paris, he was presented for the doctor's degree. In his letter of recommendation, the Franciscan Superior General commended him as a scholar "distinguished for his ingenious and very subtle learning." Following a brief stay at Paris, the youthful doctor of theology took up teaching duties at Cologne. Here he died unexpectedly in November of 1308.
John Duns Scotus is commonly known as Doctor Subtilis, the Subtle Doctor, in theological and philosophical circles. This title developed out of the clever and ingenious character of his lecturing and writing.
The Subtle Doctor is justly regarded as one of the bright lights of theology in that brilliant era of scholarship that was the thirteenth century. Intellectual giants like St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Bonaventure, and St. Albert the Great preceded him by only a brief span of time.
During his comparatively short life, Blessed John Duns Scotus produced numerous valuable writings. The majority of these written works are commentaries or treatises on disputed questions, for he was recognized as a heated controversialist, incisive in his criticism, relentless in his logic, decisive in his refutation, seemingly more adept in analyzing than in synthesizing. He left no summa or compendium of any kind.
Probably his greatest work is the Opus Oxoniensis, a sparkling commentary on the famous Sentences of Peter Lombard. The Opus Oxoniensis is noted for its orderliness and its wealth of detail. Up to the close of the thirteenth century, Peter Lombard's Sentences were accepted as the basic theological reference, as later students took to the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas.
The writings of Duns Scotus are not characterized by the clarity of St. Thomas Aquinas. Scotus' works are usually appraised as abstruse, critical writings couched in language that is obscure. His critics, of whom there are many, sometimes accuse him of leaning toward extremes, of dwelling on technicalities, and of being given to hair-splitting. But not all the writings that have borne his name are from his pen.
Duns Scotus' followers made additions and attached comments when gathering his works for publication some years after his death. Many incorrect and unfair notions have been circulated about the Subtle Doctor. Some of these mistaken opinions have not been challenged. Some of the unfavorable criticism may be attributed to the shortcomings of his followers. Part may have been caused by a lack of penetrating powers similar to those of Duns Scotus in the persons who appointed themselves as critics.
Since the sixteenth century, a Scotist school of thought has continued to study, develop, and advocate the teaching of John Duns Scotus. The chief representatives of the Scotist school have been his brothers in religion, the Franciscans.
If the Subtle Doctor did no more than untangle the puzzling elements of Mary's Immaculate Conception, the Church would be indebted to him forever. Precisely for this accomplishment we remember John Duns Scotus.
In the attempt to unravel the theological puzzle, two difficulties blocked the mental path to a complete understanding of our Blessed Mother's conception without sin.
First, was Mary in need of redemption if she had been conceived without stain of original sin?
Second, when, in the course of her conception, was Mary preserved from the stain and effects of origin of sin?
These obstacles have stymied many of the Church's leading theologians over the centuries among them St. Augustine, St. Bernard, St. Anselm, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Bonaventure. So the great teachers of the Church hesitated to proclaim the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception.
Meanwhile, popular belief shifted toward the acceptance of this special prerogative for the Mother of Christ. The feast of the Immaculate Conception was instituted in many parts of Europe, although it was already celebrated in the East since the seventh century.
Enter Duns Scotus into the academic arena of the controversy. Beginning with the general principle formulated by St. Anselm in the eleventh century, potuit, decuit, ergo fecit (it was possible, it was fitting, therefore it was accomplished), he jumped into the thick of the intellectual tussle. In a matter of time the Subtle Doctor dispelled all objections satisfactorily.
The first hurdle in the dispute regarded Mary's need of redemption. If she was conceived in the womb of her mother, St. Anne, without original sin, was she exempt from Christ's redemption? Did she not need to be redeemed?
In his Letter to the Romans (5:12), St. Paul had taught "it was through one man (Adam) that sin came into the world, and through sin death, and thus death has spread through the whole human race because everyone has sinned." Paul is telling us that everyone inherits original sin and its consequences. Therefore Mary needed to be redeemed. But Christ had not yet come to accomplish the redemption.
Duns Scotus pushed this obstruction from the path by showing that instead of being excluded from the redemption of the Savior, Mary obtained the greatest of redemptions through the mystery of her preservation from all sin. This, explained Scotus, was a more perfect redemption and attributes to Christ a more exalted role as Redeemer, because redeeming grace which preserves from original sin is greater than that which purifies from sin already incurred.
Consequently, Christ was Mary's Redeemer more perfectly by preservative redemption in shielding her from original sin through anticipating and foreseeing the merits of his passion and death. This pre-redemption indicates a much greater grace and more perfect salvation.
Since Mary was a daughter of Adam, when was she preserved from original sin and its consequences? This was another obstacle to be cleared. In resolving this second problem the Subtle Doctor cleverly saw his way clear by making the necessary distinction between the order of nature and the order of time.
Previously St. Thomas and other illustrious Doctors of the Church had reasoned that Mary was sanctified and preserved from sin either before animation, that is, before God infused a soul into the physical embryo in her mother's womb, or after animation. She could not have been sanctified before animation, otherwise she would not have had to be redeemed. If Mary was sanctified after animation, then she whom God was raising to be Satan's destroyer, was, at least for a very brief time, subject to the influence of the Prince of Darkness through contact with original sin. This line of reasoning was based on a time sequence.
Blessed John Duns Scotus explained that the time element was not the type of order in question, but rather the order of nature. Because physical generation precedes sanctification by God's grace, Mary was an heir to the debt of Adam before being made a child of God.
In our thinking we consider Mary first as a daughter of Adam and then sanctified as a daughter of God. But this does not necessarily place the soul of our Blessed Mother in two successive states--sin followed by grace. With Mary, conception and sanctification were simultaneous, producing a twofold situation at the first moment of existence.
At one and the same time, Mary, as a human descendant of Adam and Eve, contracted the debt of original sin and became by the privileged infusion of grace a daughter of God, which preserved her from the consequences of the common lot of fallen nature by a special anticipation of the merits of the Savior.
Removing these two impediments, John Duns Scotus cleared the path to a theologically sound acceptance of this Marian prerogative. By his lucid exposition and defense of the doctrine of Mary's Immaculate Conception in the womb of St. Anne as a preparation for her divine motherhood, the Subtle Doctor paved the way for its solemn definition in later times by Blessed Pope Pius IX.
Catholicism will remember the Subtle Doctor as a shrewd philosopher and an adroit theologian, one of the most eminent of that remarkable thirteenth century. To the ordinary Catholic, John Duns Scotus stands out as the champion of Mary's Immaculate Conception. In praising the Immaculate Conception, we also honor Blessed John Duns Scotus. -Brother John M. Samaha, S.M. Ave Maria! Bl. John Duns Scotus - Mass: OF, - Readings: 1st: tit 1:1-9 Resp: psa 24:1-2, 3-4, 5-6 Gsp: luk 17:1-6
To Download Audio go to http://airmaria.com?p=15787

0 Comments

Leave a Comment

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Name *

Email *

Comment *

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample